Autonomous AI systems are beginning to move beyond software environments and into warehouses, delivery networks, and public spaces. The development is drawing attention to whether current AI rules cover systems that operate in physical environments.

Most existing AI governance frameworks have focused on online harms and model outputs, including bias, misinformation, and harmful content. Embodied AI systems carry risks in physical environments, where failures can affect infrastructure, property, or human safety.

Singapore’s Infocomm Media Development Authority published version 1.5 of its Model AI Governance Framework for Agentic AI on May 20. The framework sets out guidance for organisations deploying AI agents that can plan, make decisions, and take actions across multiple steps to complete user-defined goals.

The framework says agents can interact with tools, external systems, and other agents, including systems that update databases, write files, control devices, or perform transactions. It lists access controls, monitoring, and human approval among governance measures for deployment.

AI moves into physical systems

At an AI summit in Singapore last week, discussions around robotics and embodied AI focused on operational safety issues more commonly associated with aviation, industrial systems, and critical infrastructure oversight than conventional software regulation.

Speakers also discussed whether autonomous systems can operate safely and reliably in unpredictable real-world environments over extended periods.

Dr. Ya-Qin Zhang, founding dean of the Institute for AI Industry Research at Tsinghua University, said embodied AI systems amplify risks already associated with autonomous software. He said failures can directly affect transport systems, drones, logistics networks, and critical infrastructure.

“Any risk in the digital domain will be amplified in the physical domain, and the physical domain will have a physical consequence,” Zhang told MLex on the sidelines of the summit.

He added that vehicles, drones, smart grids, and other infrastructure could become exposed as AI systems are embedded more deeply into physical operations.

Speakers discussed reliability, operational monitoring, and post-deployment assurance as governance concerns. Summit discussions pointed to deployment-based governance models built around simulation, telemetry, and iterative testing, rather than one-time certification alone.

IMDA’s framework also recommends gradual rollouts, continuous monitoring, and further testing after deployment. It says agents interact dynamically with their environment and not all risks can be anticipated before release.

Monitoring becomes a deployment issue

Grab, which is piloting autonomous vehicles and delivery robots in Singapore’s Punggol district, said deployment governance depends heavily on simulation, testing, and continuous monitoring.

“We do a lot of simulation, we do a lot of testing in closed courses and open courses in order to make sure our robots are reliable,” Suthen Thomas Paradatheth, Grab’s chief technology officer, said during one of the summit panels.

“Before we scale to hundreds of robots, we make sure we crack it first in simulation and with a few robots,” he added.

Grab also pointed to monitoring systems designed to track robot performance and detect unexpected failures after deployment.

“There’s a long tail of issues that could emerge,” Paradatheth said.

The IMDA framework says organisations should assess agentic AI use cases based on data access, external system access, autonomy, and task complexity. It also points to the scope and reversibility of agent actions, third-party involvement, and overall system complexity.

It also recommends limiting agent access to tools and systems, applying least-privilege permissions, and defining standard operating procedures for agent workflows. Organisations should also set mechanisms to take agents offline when they malfunction.

Accountability spreads across more actors

MLex reported that embodied AI systems can involve several parties across development, manufacturing, and deployment. These include AI developers, robotics manufacturers, semiconductor suppliers, and infrastructure operators.

MLex also noted that responsibility can be harder to assign when systems continue adapting after deployment through software updates, telemetry, and operational data.

IMDA says organisations and humans remain accountable for agent actions, even when agents operate autonomously. The framework calls for clear responsibility across the agentic AI value chain, from model and platform providers to deployers, tooling providers, and end users.

Applied Materials said large-scale robotics deployment is also tied to semiconductor economics and systems integration. Om Nalamasu, the company’s chief technology officer, said robotics systems will depend on better sensors, energy efficiency, advanced packaging, and computing architectures.

Nalamasu said robotics systems would require purpose-built designs adapted to specific industrial ecosystems rather than a single solution for all environments.

Zhao Yuli, chief strategy officer of Chinese robotics startup Galbot, said Beijing is prioritising deployment scale and industrial commercialisation through government-backed testbeds, industrial partnerships, and long-term funding initiatives.

Galbot has deployed humanoid robotics systems in retail, warehouse, and pharmaceutical operations in China. These include autonomous stores that operate around the clock. Zhao said semi-structured industrial environments are likely to become an early commercialisation path because they offer more controllable operating conditions.

Japan is placing more focus on standards-setting, robotics datasets, and safety governance. Professor Yutaka Matsuo of the University of Tokyo’s Graduate School of Engineering pointed to an “AI Association” project aimed at collecting 100,000 hours of robotics data to support robotic foundation models.

Matsuo also referred to Japan’s AI Safety Institute and the Hiroshima AI Process as part of broader efforts to develop governance standards for embodied AI systems with Singapore and other Asian countries.

Singapore sets out agent controls

Singapore’s framework sets out four governance areas for agentic AI. These cover upfront risk assessment, human accountability, technical controls, and end-user responsibility. The framework describes them as an iterative process rather than a one-time assessment.

The framework says human oversight has to be adapted for agentic systems because continuous review of all workflows becomes impractical at scale. It recommends human approval at significant checkpoints, including high-stakes actions, irreversible actions, and outlier behaviour.

IMDA also identifies automation bias and alert fatigue as risks when humans supervise capable agents. It recommends auditing oversight through indicators such as human override rates and response times, and using automated real-time monitoring to flag unexpected behaviour.

The framework says users should be told what actions an agent can take, what data it can access, and what responsibilities remain with the user. It also recommends employee training on human-agent interaction, oversight, and the professional skills needed to assess agent outputs.

Companies test AI in regulated workflows

JPMorgan is implementing AI tools across its global investment banking business, Paul Uren, the bank’s Asia Pacific head of investment banking, told Reuters. The bank said the tools help bankers access more information and synthesise it with internal systems. They are also being used to prepare content and support client engagement.

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon told Bloomberg News that the bank would hire more AI specialists and fewer traditional bankers. Reuters reported that global banks are increasing AI investment, reshaping workforces, and changing job roles.

The bank is also among selected organisations permitted by Anthropic to use its Mythos cybersecurity model under a controlled initiative known as Project Glasswing. According to Anthropic, Mythos can detect old vulnerabilities in browsers, infrastructure, and software.

Reuters reported that Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley also have access to, or are testing, Mythos, citing sources and company executives.

IMDA’s framework includes a case study from OCBC Bank of Singapore on source-of-wealth analysis. The system parses income-related documents and drafts a source-of-wealth memo. It does not make credit, onboarding, or risk decisions autonomously.

In that case, the workflow is limited to task-level autonomy and operates only when triggered by predefined workflows. Human review is required at critical decision points, and final validation remains with designated reviewers.

Robots move into industrial use

In Japan, one-third of companies are already using or considering AI-powered robots, according to a Reuters survey conducted by Nikkei Research from May 1 to May 15. The survey contacted 492 companies, with 220 responding on the condition of anonymity.

About 4% of respondents said they already use AI robots, 5% plan to deploy them, and 25% are considering doing so. The remaining 66% said they had no such plans.

Transportation equipment manufacturers were the most active group in the survey, with 80% already using AI robots or considering deployment. By comparison, 94% of wholesale sector respondents said they had no plans to deploy AI robots.

Among companies using, planning to use, or considering AI robots, 71% selected manufacturing as a use case. Another 19% selected dangerous tasks, while 11% selected customer-facing services.

The Japanese government expects AI robots to help address the country’s chronic labour shortage and support its position in industrial robotics. Japan is home to robotics companies including Fanuc, Yaskawa Electric, and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, but faces competition from China and the United States in AI-enabled robotics.

Retail agents expand beyond search

Walmart has outlined plans to use agentic AI across shopping, employee, supplier, and developer workflows.

In July 2025, the retailer announced plans for four AI-powered “super agents.” They are designed for shoppers, store employees, suppliers and sellers, and software developers. Walmart said these agents would become the main entry point for AI interactions across those groups.

One of the tools, Sparky, is already available in Walmart’s app as a generative AI-powered shopping assistant. Hari Vasudev, Walmart’s US chief technology officer, said its expanded version would be able to reorder items and plan events. It would also use computer vision to suggest recipes based on the contents of a shopper’s fridge.

Walmart is also developing an Associate super agent for store workers and corporate staff. A separate Marty agent is being built for sellers, suppliers, and advertisers. The retailer is also working on a Developer super agent for testing, building, and launching future AI tools.

The company declined to say whether the agents would replace jobs. Dave Glick, senior vice president of enterprise business systems, said the tools would create new jobs, without giving further details.

(Photo by Growtika)

See also: OpenAI opens Singapore AI lab as IMDA updates AI framework

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events, click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post Autonomous AI systems test governance in physical environments appeared first on AI News.

OpenAI will open its first Applied AI Lab outside the US in Singapore. The lab is part of a new partnership with the Ministry of Digital Development and Information.

The initiative, called OpenAI for Singapore, was announced at the ATx Summit and is backed by a commitment of more than S$300 million.

The lab will create more than 200 Singapore-based technical roles over the next few years. OpenAI said Singapore will also become one of its global hubs for forward-deployed engineers who will work with organisations on AI deployment. OpenAI said the lab’s work will be aligned with Singapore’s AI Mission priorities which include public service, finance, and digital infrastructure.

Focus on deployment and talent

The company will work with government agencies and local partners on education and workforce programmes within the Ministry of Education and GovTech. OpenAI also plans to support educators through a Singapore chapter of the OpenAI Academy, participate in the National AI Impact Programme, and run Codex for Teachers hackathons.

The partnership includes plans to work with local partners on accelerator programmes for AI-native startups in the form of workshops for micro-entrepreneurs and small businesses, covering how founders and SMEs can use AI in operations and customer service.

Chng Kai Fong, Permanent Secretary for Digital Development and Information, said Singapore’s response to AI includes growing new sectors, anchoring global frontier companies, and equipping workers with relevant skills.

Singapore updates agentic AI framework

Singapore has also updated its governance framework for agentic AI, which was launched by the Infocomm Media Development Authority at the World Economic Forum in January 2026. The framework builds on Singapore’s earlier Model AI Governance Framework for AI, introduced in 2020, and gives organisations guidance on the responsible deployment of AI agents, including measures to reduce the risks inherent in agentic AI.

IMDA has now updated the framework after seeking feedback and case studies from the industry, with the revised version following input from more than 60 organisations, including AWS, DBS, Google, and Salesforce.

The update adds guidance on risks linked to multi-agent systems, third-party agents, automation bias, and human accountability. The framework now includes more than ten case studies showing how organisations have applied its recommendations.

The case studies were contributed by Singaporean and international organisations, including Ant International, City Developments Limited, Cyber Sierra, Dayos, Google, Knovel, OCBC, PwC, Stability Solutions, Tencent, Terminal 3, Workday, X0PA, and GovTech Singapore.

Case studies show governance controls

One case study focuses on Dayos, a Singapore-headquartered enterprise AI automation company with operations in the US. Dayos built an AI-powered ticketing agent that handles internal IT requests. The agent can resolve some requests automatically and route requests to a human when needed.

Dayos used tiered risk levels to determine what actions the agent could take. Low-risk and reversible actions, like password resets, could be automated and audited biweekly, while moderate-risk actions required human approval before execution. Higher-risk actions, like permission changes with limited reversibility, were excluded from the agent’s authority.

Tencent contributed a case study on CodeBuddy, an agentic AI coding system developed by Tencent Cloud. CodeBuddy can plan, write, and deploy code through natural language instructions and can access filesystems, terminal commands, external APIs, and MCP tools.

CodeBuddy uses preset defaults and configurable permissions. Human approval is required for actions like editing files, running shell commands, making network requests, or using external tools.

The system explains complex commands in plain language before users approve them. Suspicious commands still require human approval, even if similar commands had been pre-approved.

GovTech Singapore’s case study covers the rollout of agentic coding assistants in government. The first phase was limited to GovTech employees, did not allow external tools, and was restricted to low-risk systems. GovTech developed central logging and a framework for connecting approved external tools. The agency also tested the system against potential attacks.

(Photo by Mike Enerio)

See also: GPT-5.5 is OpenAI’s most capable agentic AI model yet

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events, click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post OpenAI opens Singapore AI lab as IMDA updates AI framework appeared first on AI News.

The ceremony was scheduled. The CEOs were on the guest list. And then it wasn’t happening.

On Thursday, US President Donald Trump scrapped a planned AI executive order, which had already been delayed multiple times, citing concerns that it might erode America’s competitive edge over China.

“We’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. What he did not say was that the order had been effectively killed by the very industry it was meant to oversee.

Lobbied out in one night

According to Semafor, which first reported the backstory, the White House’s plans were halted after Elon Musk of xAI, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and venture capitalist David Sacks, who, until recently, was Trump’s AI and cryptocurrency tsar, all spoke directly with Trump between Wednesday night and Thursday morning.

The argument that landed, according to US media, citing sources, was an appeal to the “accelerationist” faction in the administration, including officials at the National Economic Council and staffers in the Vice President’s office.

The order itself was not a sweeping regulatory framework. It would have established a voluntary mechanism for AI developers to engage with federal agencies and submit advanced models for security review up to 90 days before their public release. No licensing regime. No mandatory hold periods. Voluntary.

That was apparently still too much. Trump said he postponed it “because I didn’t like certain aspects of it,” declining to specify which ones. He added that he worried it “could have been a blocker,” a telling phrase from a president who has otherwise positioned AI as a jobs and national security priority.

A vacuum with consequences

The US has yet to pass comprehensive AI legislation. What governance architecture exists has been assembled piecemeal, through executive orders, agency guidance, and voluntary agreements. Earlier this month, the federal Centre for AI Standards and Innovation announced evaluation agreements with Google DeepMind, Microsoft, and xAI, allowing the government to assess models before public availability. That programme continues regardless of Thursday’s non-signing.

But the broader picture is one of regulatory drift. In early March, the Trump administration released a National AI Legislative Framework urging Congress to preempt state-level AI laws that “impose undue burdens,” arguing for a single national standard over what it called “fifty discordant ones.” Congress has not acted on it.

The contrast with China is sharp and increasingly difficult to ignore. Beijing’s State Council issued a 2026 legislative work plan in May outlining plans to accelerate comprehensive AI legislation, deploying language on AI governance in formal planning documents for the first time. The National People’s Congress has listed AI legislation for review for the third consecutive year.

In April, Beijing issued new rules requiring AI companies to establish internal ethics review committees. China is writing rules. Washington is cancelling ceremonies.

Who shapes US AI policy

Thursday’s episode clarified something implicit for months: in the current administration, the effective veto on AI regulation sits with a small group of industry principals who have direct access to the president.

Musk, whose xAI is a direct competitor to OpenAI and Anthropic, has a structural interest in keeping the regulatory field open. Zuckerberg’s Meta has similarly positioned itself as a champion of open-source AI development. Sacks, despite having formally left his White House advisory role in March, evidently retains enough influence to shape executive action.

Separately, Semafor reports that OpenAI has secured White House backing for a parallel effort to push AI regulations at the state level, an interesting manoeuvre given that Trump’s earlier executive order threatened states that enacted AI laws the administration disliked. That the administration appears to be simultaneously discouraging state regulation and endorsing OpenAI’s state-level strategy suggests the policy coherence problem runs deeper than one postponed signing.

The China frame does real work, but in both directions

Trump’s stated reason for pulling back, protecting the US lead over China, is the same logic that has driven every major AI policy decision since he returned to office, from the H200 export licence framework to the Stargate infrastructure programme. It is also the logic that China is watching closely.

At the Trump-Xi summit in Beijing earlier this month, the two leaders agreed to launch an intergovernmental dialogue on AI, according to the Chinese Foreign Ministry. Beijing will have noted that Washington’s internal debate about even voluntary AI oversight was resolved not by policymakers, but by the companies that stand to profit most from the absence of guardrails.

In a report by the South China Morning Post, Lizzi C. Lee, a fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute’s Centre for China Analysis, noted that both the US and China are grappling with the same underlying question: where should the regulatory frontier sit for frontier AI, particularly as models become more capable of autonomous action and more relevant to cybersecurity.

“I think a separate, potentially more important race is on governance and safety: not about who has the most advanced models, but who can govern powerful AI without choking off innovation,” she said.

The same report highlighted what Kyle Chan at the Brookings Institution put it more simply: “AI safety and regulation can be done in a way that doesn’t compromise innovation.”

Neither argument was enough on Thursday. Whether it becomes enough next time, assuming there is a next time, remains unclear.

(Photo by White House)

See also: The US-China AI gap closes amid responsible AI concerns

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events, click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post Musk and Zuckerberg convinced Trump to scrap AI executive order appeared first on AI News.

The AI and Big Data programme on day two of TechEx North America referred at least once to the “AI graveyard,” meaning the large number of pilots that never become durable systems. That phrase set the tone. The question was proof.

The Enterprise AI Implementation, ROI and Adoption track dealt with the hard middle of AI work. Its sessions covered stalled pilots, agentic AI for business impact, the move from experimentation to impact, the decision to buy or build, and durable ROI and autonomous decisioning. A system has to be adopted, governed and measured before it deserved to be called successful.

The session on the AI graveyard was useful because it named the failure pattern. Many companies have enough budget to start AI experiments and enough executive attention to publicise them. Fewer have the data quality, process design, operating authority, and risk control to keep them going.

A day-two session on moving beyond copilots towards agentic AI framed the issue as business impact not novelty. Copilots have been useful as individual productivity tools, but their value is often hard to measure. Agents promise a closer connection to business process, yet they also increase the need for boundaries. An agent that can act in systems has to be evaluated by the quality of the action.

That point linked directly with the Future of AI track. Its opening theme, trust as a competitive advantage, was a useful counterweight to speed. The programme dealt with transparency, governance, regulation, banking analytics, and risk. It also included material from Hex on data agent, with evaluation and governance built in. Agentic AI will not mature in enterprise settings if evaluation remains informal.

Governance appeared in several forms. There was cross-functional governance, which reflects the reality that AI risk does not belong to legal, security or engineering. There was governance in the data layer, where trust depends on lineage and quality. There was governance around agent personas and risk stacks, where companies need to understand what an AI agent is permitted to know and do. The banking session gave the theme a sectoral focus, since financial services have less room for undefinedassurances about automation.

Digital Transformation Week carried the same day-two pressure into business delivery. The programme was built around real use cases, business impact, ROI, AI agents built on APIs, change readiness, government service transformation, city innovation and the conversion of data into financial value. The change-readiness material was especially important. AI fails because staff do not change routines, managers do not alter incentives, or the data needed for daily use never appears in the right place.

Sessions involving the DMV and the City of San Jose placed AI and transformation inside government service. In government, the measure of quality includes reliability, access, explainability and public trust. The Dow material on turning data into dollars sat at the commercial end of the same argument. In both cases, value depends on connecting data work with an accountable outcome.

The Cyber Security and Cloud Expo day-two programme expanded on risk. Its cloud-first enterprise track dealt with AI-led threats, cloud security, the “GenAI velocity gap,” threat intelligence, identity security and AI governance. The cyber programme treated AI as a force that changes attack and defence alike. It can help automate defensive work, but it can also accelerate misuse, widen leakage routes, and increase the strain on existing controls.

The phrase “velocity gap” was used several times during day two. Business units are adopting generative AI faster than many security teams can oversee it: the tools arrive first, policy and monitoring arrive later. The sessions on jailbreaking and data leaks made the point more concretely. If staff place sensitive material into unsanctioned tools, or if approved AI systems are poorly bounded, cloud security and data governance become one and the same.

Zero trust was presented as one answer, with a stronger interpretation of zero trust must now include AI systems, agents, and the data around them. Identity is not limited to human users, but services, agents and automated workflows require permission models as well. The cloud-first enterprise is therefore becoming a place where identity, data classification, AI governance, and threat detection are part of the same control mechanisms.

(Image source: TechEx/TechForge)

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and co-located with other leading technology events. Click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post Proving the case on day two at TechEx North America appeared first on AI News.

President Trump flew to Beijing, brought Jensen Huang along at the last minute, and left two days later, telling reporters that “something could happen” on chip exports. Nothing did. Not a single Nvidia H200 has shipped to China since Trump first authorised the sales in December 2025, and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told Bloomberg that semiconductor controls were not even on the bilateral agenda. 

The summit theatre obscured a more interesting development underneath it. The H200 isn’t stuck because Washington won’t allow it. Washington already has allowed it. Roughly 10 Chinese firms, including Alibaba, Tencent, ByteDance, and JD.com, hold approved US export licences for up to 75,000 units each, with Lenovo and Foxconn authorised as distributors. The chips aren’t moving because Beijing won’t let its own companies take delivery.

Two frameworks, one deadlock

The mechanics of the stalemate are worth understanding clearly. US rules require that all H200 chips ordered by Chinese clients be used only in China. Beijing, meanwhile, has instructed Chinese tech companies to limit their use of Nvidia chips to overseas operations while supporting domestic manufacturing. The two requirements are mutually exclusive. 

Chips cleared for export cannot legally be deployed where Beijing wants to deploy them, and Beijing won’t authorise the domestic use the US licences require, according to Implicator.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick stated at a Senate hearing last month that Chinese firms are trying to keep their investment focused on domestic suppliers, including Huawei. Beijing’s State Council has also ordered a supply-chain security review aimed at cutting dependence on US semiconductors. 

The policy contradiction is not accidental. That is the point.

What Huawei gained while diplomats talked

The days around the summit produced several data points that matter more for the long term than Trump’s parting comment. DeepSeek confirmed its latest model had been optimised to run on Huawei processors. Tencent’s chief strategy officer said Chinese GPU supply would increase progressively through 2026, and an Alibaba executive said its T-Head proprietary GPUs had achieved scaled mass production. 

This follows the April launch of DeepSeek V4, which adapted the model for Huawei’s Ascend chips – the first major Chinese frontier model to do so in training, not just inference. What the summit week confirmed is that the shift is no longer experimental. It is now a supply-chain policy. Nvidia’s China revenue has fallen to roughly 5% in recent quarters, down from above 20% before export controls tightened. The company’s own guidance for the current quarter assumes zero revenue from China. 

Huang’s last-minute inclusion in the delegation – Trump called him directly after seeing media coverage that he had not been invited – suggested urgency. The outcome suggested the limits of what CEO diplomacy can achieve when the obstruction is structural, not procedural.

The read for the AI industry

The stalemate matters beyond bilateral optics. Chinese AI platforms are now operating under a domestic mandate to build on Huawei’s compute stack. The question of which AI hardware architecture becomes dominant in the world’s second-largest AI market is being answered not by technical benchmarks but by government directive.

Beijing steering platforms toward Huawei Ascend chips rather than Nvidia H200S is not just a trade posture. It is a structural bet that the performance gap will close fast enough that being locked into the domestic stack is manageable. DeepSeek V4’s results suggest it may be right, at least for inference workloads. 

Trump said something could happen. Greer said the decision is sovereign for China. Both are true, and neither changes the current position: the H200 deal is approved, licensed, and frozen, with Huawei filling the space it leaves behind.

(Image source: The White House)

See Also: Can China’s chip stacking strategy really challenge Nvidia’s AI dominance?

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and co-located with other leading technology events. Click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post The Nvidia H200 China deal survived the Trump-Xi summit–just not in the way anyone expected appeared first on AI News.